On Thursday, May 17, the Otis PTA hosted an information session between Ms. Kirsten Vital, AUSD Superintendent, and Ms. Gray Harris, Alameda Education Association President. Each party was advocating their positions, which is course is why they were there. However, what struck me during this process is that all this arguing and advocating needs to stop going on in public. During the meeting, and subsequently in writing, I asked both parties to consider stopping everything that is going on in public; basically take the negotiations back behind closed doors.
I am horrified with how these negotiations are being played out in public — Facebook pages, websites, rallies, parent forums, petitions, leafleting outside schools, at the Park Street fair, and at a recent community-based event at the Alameda Theatre, plus private emails from teachers to the parents in their classrooms. This behavior is extremely destructive to the good faith we developed with the parents and community during the parcel tax elections.
There are two reasons I asked both parties to stop airing all this dirty laundry in public:
1. Galvanizing parents to take sides in negotiations is unhealthy for everyone. Parents should be advocates for their children, not for the teachers or the district in their contract negotiations. On Thursday night and then again on Friday, many parents thanked me for speaking up. They, too, want the public arguing to come to a close and the pressure from teachers to stop. They would like the union and the district to negotiate on their own — professionally and maturely — and keep the community out of it. But many parents are uncomfortable speaking up about it.
2. The community is losing faith in both sides. How will we come back from this fighting? Will the community trust these parties in the future? I don't think so, do you? Measure A's seven years will go by very quickly and before you know it, we will be back before the same voters asking for another parcel tax or for a bond measure for our aging facilities. I have already had people tell me they will never vote for another parcel tax again. That won't be good for teachers, for students or for the district as a whole. The pieces of the pie are getting smaller; the budget is going to get worse, not better. Our schools need the support of our community.
So I am pleading with both sides: take down the Facebook page, take down the part of the district website about negotiations, stop the rallies, stop the parent forums to agitate the parents, stop the leaflets, stop the petitions. Go back behind closed doors like it used to be. The parents are sick and tired of all of this and our students are confused. I know the parties can come to an agreement, but they must do it behind closed doors, not in public.
Ms Vital has agreed to do this if the AEA will do it too. I hope that by Monday, May 21, this all goes quiet. Please, Ms. Harris and Ms. Vital, make it stop.
I know we have our children's best interests at heart. It's the economy that is killing our schools. Let's not make it worse with more bad publicity of our own making.
And before you get ready to attack me in public, please remember this, I want the best for everyone.
Thank you,
Sarah Olaes
Otis Parent/Volunteer
Volunteer Chair Measures E & A
Editor's note: Letters to the editor are published at the discretion of Alameda Patch's editor in accordance with the site's Terms of Use. If you have a letter you would like to be considered for publication, please e-mail dixiemjordan@gmail.com. Letters should be no longer than 600 words and will not be posted anonymously. Please include a daytime phone number with your email in case we need to contact you for verification or questions. Your phone number will not be published.
All that being said, I agree that these negotiations seem to have eroded significant community good wiil towards our schools and that is very sad after all that we have been through recently.
Next was MEDIATION, where the Dist demanded a number of concessions from AEA, like allowing anonymous complaints and taking away the # of articles to bargain. When the T. A. was strongly rejected by AEA, the dist filed for FACT FINDING. A non-binding judgment by the state, which, when the process is completed, allows the dist to do something AUSD has NEVER done before, IMPOSE contract language on teachers. The act of IMPOSITION severs the dist and the teacher's responsibility to bargain in good faith. Only if the dist IMPOSES is an association allowed to strike. We are days away from the dist initiated FACT FINDING meeting. Even if Fact Finding rules in AEA's favor, the dist will still be able to IMPOSE. While I understand parent's confusion with this process, please note that we are in unprecedented times. My time-line covers the last two years. During that time teacher's morale at AUSD has declined to an all time low. If you don't believe me, ask a teacher. Also know that while AUSD is in the driving seat with Fact Finding, there is one thing EVERY parent can do to help get us ALL on the right track. Email, call, and send a letter to the Board of Education saying; I am a parent of an AUSD student. I don’t want the district to impose. I don’t want there to be a strike. I want AUSD and AEA to bargain a fair contract.
I note that the District has removed the grievance summary, and according to Ms. Olaes, the Superintendent has indicated that she is willing to participate in a public cease fire. Those look like pretty good steps towards trying to rebuild trust. But the AEA will have to participate too. Also, An Alameda Teacher, you're pretty condescending when you assume that we parents are "confused." Many of us understand the facts and history pretty well. We're not dumb or naive; we just don't happen to agree with the AEA's tactics. And just as an aside, An Alameda Teacher, you do realize that the only issue where the District requested fact finding was class size? On the rest of the issues, there has been no demand for fact finding. If the AEA really wants to strike just for the sake of having K-3 class size reduced to 20:1, I think they'll find that they do not have the public's support. Personally, because of the costs and disruptions that would occur if class size was reduced, I would favor having the district impose class size if it meant that current class sizes would be maintained.
Thank you Deni for your reply. I want to know what's going on too. It'll help me decide if home schooling, charter or private are better options. HELEN... as a parent, class size is why I would choose a different option. Class sizes should be smaller for young children. That's why I voted for Measure A. Where's the oversight committee on that promise Ms. Vital gave me as a voter
If you look at the language of Meaure A, it specifically states that its purpose was to maintain class size at 25:1, not reduce class size. According to the District, a reduction of class size to 20:1 would cost almost $900,000 and would require the diversion of about 180 students from their neighborhood schools. That $900,000 would have to come out of cuts somewhere else in the budget.
• A portion of the ballot language regarding class size is as follows: Small Class Sizes: 13-14 % of the Available Revenues of this Measure shall be dedicated annually to maintaining manageable elementary class sizes with student to teacher ratios no greater than 25 to 1 in K-3 classrooms. The full text can be found here: http://www.alameda.k12.ca.us/images/stories/pdfs/master_plan/b_p_3221.pdf • You can review any oversight committee documents on the AUSD website under the Board of Education tab. http://www.alameda.k12.ca.us/index.php/board-of-education/oversight-and-advisory-committees/measure-a-oversight-advisory-committee • There will be an informational update on Measure A at the May 22 meeting. The meeting will be televised on Comcast Channel 15
When "Lesson 9" was a hot topic a few years ago, a few friends through my childrens' activities seperated away from my because I supported the lessons and they did not. Now, I am worried who will treat my children, my husband or myself differently because I am fighting to be treated fairly by my employer. As a union employee, contract negotiations are nearly always reported by the media, regardless of what union one belongs to. And with social media used by so many now, such as Facebook and Patch, news is reported every minute, by any person, such as Sarah. Anne mentioned the School Board meeting in regards to the oversight committe, but I will stand with my union on Tuesday because that is my right as a union member and the elected school board officials need to hear what we have to say.
We live in a free and open democratic society. The price we pay for that is sometimes messy. Considering that they are talking about how to spend tax money, we should hear what negotiattions are revealing. There's a lot of "my way or the highway" attitude in Alameda lately. I suspect it's all the displaced SF families moving here, bringing that selfish attitude with them. It didn't used to be that way. You said " I do not want to anger the parents of my students. Retribution does occur in Alameda. " Sounds like these people are NOT your friends if they retaliate against you and your child if you disagree with them. I would be circumspect in communicating with them on this topic.
Please know if any parent was offended, I apologize for using the word "confused." Your posts have shown you to be very familiar with both the past contract, MOU, and the rejected TA, more then most parents or teachers. But your words stating my post says "AEA Is not willing to back off..and continue strong arming parents..." seems to be the type of rhetoric that Sarah is talking about. I also find it problamatic with the sup telling parents that she'll back down on her public dialogue if AEA does. Sharing that with parents seems to be just a continuation of the problem. This also leads to the point if the DIST is so aghast at the upheaval due to community communications, why have they used the AUSD web site and emails to parents for so long. I'm glad they took down the grievences, but why put them up in the first place? Your point about fact finding being about one issue, is correct, but your argument carries against the district as well. Is the district willing to IMPOSE, for the first time in its history, over one issue? An issue that the district and teachers are currently bargaining about? Whether you agree or disagree with AEA, whats wrong with telling the Board; you don't want the dist to impose you don't want a strike you want AEA and the dist to bargain a fair contract? Isn't that why people are asking to bring down the rhetoric? So the dist and AEA bargain a fair contract....?
Let's focus on accord. As soon as the district office offers the teachers a small raise that is not linked to demeaning changes in their working conditions, we will all be happier and be able to move on to better topics (like where to buy the sweetest watermelon).
AEA will continue to urge the AUSD Administration to return to our Past Practice of closed negotiating.
I want to confirm Ms Vital did agree during the meeting to stop all the public dissemination of information. She also came up to me after the meeting in person to state it. I checked in with her this morning as people were emailing me saying they had been told she not agreed. Ms Vital confirmed her agreement again this morning
If the sup wants the dialogue to be private, why is she sharing it with you? Did she give you permission to share her thoughts when you talked to her this morning? Jack, please search "AEA" on this site. You will see a very specific letter from AEA president Gray Harris that explains why the TA was rejected. Alameda Resident, I am amazed at your younger self's political savvy. It is rare for someone young to be able to see a group's machinations. I must ask you where you have seen AEA target students? You don't mean AEA's website or the petition at the street fair? I'm having trouble connecting those community events and formats to targeting children.